Trey Gowdy: Feds are changing the names of Benghazi survivors and dispersing them throughout the country

posted at 2:01 pm on August 2, 2013 by Allahpundit

An essential follow-up to yesterday’s CNN bombshell. Skip to 2:30 if you don’t have time for it all. The implication, very clearly, is that this is being done not to protect intelligence assets from terrorist retribution but to “protect” them from Republicans asking inconvenient questions. Which isn’t the first time the GOP’s had trouble talking to relevant personnel: Marine Col. George Bristol was somehow indisposed for months, with the Pentagon unwilling to reveal his whereabouts to investigators, before the House Armed Services Committee finally landed him for a classified briefing this past week.

Fox News has learned that at least five CIA employees were forced to sign additional nondisclosure agreements this past spring in the wake of the Benghazi attack. These employees had already signed such agreements before the attack but were made to sign new agreements aimed at discouraging survivors from leaking their stories to the media or anyone else…

Lawmakers penned a letter earlier this week to newly confirmed FBI Director James Comey urging him to aggressively identify and pursue the [Benghazi] suspects.

“It has been more than 10 months since the attacks. We appear to be no closer to knowing who was responsible today than we were in the early weeks following the attack,” they wrote. “This is simply unacceptable.”

My theory for why the FBI’s been keeping its distance from the Benghazi jihadis is that the White House doesn’t do want to do anything rash, like order a wave of captures and arrests, that might further destabilize the Libyan government. There’s an obvious alternative explanation, though, after yesterday’s CNN report: If the CIA and White House are so paranoid about info on Benghazi leaking that they’d try to intimidate American operatives into silence, maybe they don’t want the FBI investigating what happened. The more the Bureau knows, the greater the chance that someone there will leak. Assuming there’s something to the theory that the CIA was helping Libyan jihadis send weapons to Syria, what happens if a team of FBI sits down with someone who knows what was going on and he spills the beans?

Of course, that raises the question of why the attackers — some of whom have been interviewed by U.S. media — haven’t already spilled the beans to reporters. Maybe they fear that if they say something, then the White House is sure to target them; if they keep quiet, could be that they’ll be let off the hook. Then again, that same logic applied to Snowden and he calculated, not unreasonably, that his best defense was to ID himself precisely because it would make the feds think twice about taking him out. If you’re a Benghazi jihadi, what’s the smarter way to keep Uncle Sam’s hands off of you — lie low and hope that he doesn’t come knocking on the door, or step into the spotlight so that he can’t kill you without the whole world perceiving it as an attempt to silence a key witness?

All of which is to say, if this really was some sort of arms-smuggling operation, why have none of the bad guys confirmed it yet?

My theory for why the FBI’s been keeping its distance from the Benghazi jihadis is that the White House doesn’t do want to do anything rash, like order a wave of captures and arrests, that might further destabilize the Libyan government.

Yeah, it couldn’t be that Obama knows that the truth about his craven abandonment of Americans under attack in Benghazi for political reasons would outrage the entire country, so he ordered the FBI to lay off. And Obama isn’t worried about revelations he violated the War Powers Act and numerous other federal laws and international arms treaties by secretly transferring weapons to Islamists in Syria.

All of which is to say, if this really was some sort of arms-smuggling operation, why have none of the bad guys confirmed it yet?

Perhaps they didn’t understand with what they were interfering — the shipment of key Al Qaeda weapons by the US to Al Qaeda. If they do now know this, do you think they are going to tell us on which side the bread is buttered?

I want to know what real power, if any, Congress has to bring the executive branch down? Would someone at Hot Air please do an informative article about what Congress can actually do about any of this beside talk to the media and have hearings? Someone has to stop this criminality before we are little more than a dictatorship. Can Congress stop this madness?

My theory for why the FBI’s been keeping its distance from the Benghazi jihadis is that the White House doesn’t do want to do anything rash, like order a wave of captures and arrests, that might further destabilize the Libyan government.

Yeah, it couldn’t be that Obama knows that the truth about his craven abandonment of Americans under attack in Benghazi for political reasons would outrage the entire country, so he ordered the FBI to lay off. And Obama isn’t worried about revelations he violated the War Powers Act and numerous other federal laws and international arms treaties by secretly transferring weapons to Islamists in Syria.

Yeah, I’m sure he is just worried about destabilizing Libya.

novaculus on August 2, 2013 at 6:01 PM

HA is famous for tiptoeing on eggshells. Wouldn’t want to get labeled as a conspiracy site and all.

The reason the Benghazi scandal will eventually peter out, is that too many people of power and influence on both sides of the political divide, have too much invested in what was going on there.

It’s not as if there were no precedent for this. The black arms drops through Croatia to the Islamist Izzetbegovic regime in Sarajevo during the Bosnian Conflict mirrors Behghazi pretty closely. Similar actions, similar means, same cast of characters.

My theory for why the FBI’s been keeping its distance from the Benghazi jihadis is that the White House doesn’t do want to do anything rash, like order a wave of captures and arrests, that might further destabilize the Libyan government.

My theory is that the FBI is afraid their investigation might find some facts.

Assuming there’s something to the theory that the CIA was helping Libyan jihadis send weapons to Syria, what happens if a team of FBI sits down with someone who knows what was going on and he spills the beans?

An FBI investigator is suddenly signing nondisclosure agreements, changing his name, and being relocated?

I’ve always admired someone who would work for the CIA. Not necessarily every mission that the agency takes on, but operators themselves. I cannot imagine that we are to the point where operators will not openly tell the truth about what happened to protect an administration for purely ideological and political reasons – that is what your Chinese or Russian counterparts would do.

And there seems to be no recourse for the American people or Congress.

Where are you, all you truth-tellers? Your administration and your agency were too smart by half in trying to triangulate all of this bullshit, and every single one of you knows it. America is owed the truth regardless of the consequences.

Why isn’t David Patraeus on Capital Hill this minute explaining the operation, the arms trading and the authorization in detail?

And what was the President doing on this night in question? Who was at the White House and was he even available to take calls?

Makes me wonder who is going to write the history of this mess and how truthful it will be. We are just finding that General Eisenhower ordered hundreds of thousands of German POW’s starved to death and Russia took 25,000 American POW’s held in German prison of war camps back to Russia never to return to the USA.

Of course it would have some condition such as…..my media interviewer would be Molly Line of Fox News, and would have to include a round of interviews with all of the ‘ladies of Fox’, but I’m sure some agreement could be reached.

Throw in a morning session with Sarah on Fox and Friends and the Truth….would just have to get out there.

Where are the Colonels, the Generals and the Admirals that still have any sense of conscience and any sense of duty to the Constitution and the American people?

oldroy on August 2, 2013 at 6:52 PM

I suspect they are worried about what the admin has with which to intimidate them and destroy their careers. Since they monitor everything and spy on us, they sure spy on potential whistleblowers and opponents. All of this spying made me wonder what 0 had on John Roberts.

I am sick and tired of these lying sacks of possum ____ republicans that suck, suck, suck at being any type of opposition party. Boehner sent out another FB post about some pissy little vote about ObamaCare that means NOTHING.

In short, FLOOD THE FREAKING TOWN HALLS and offices of these worthless politicians over the next month. Ask them about those three things over and over again. And you might throw in something about their 75% supported Healthcare that Politico reported about that they got for their precious staff at the Capitol.

And sorry Trey Gowdy is a complete squish on Amnesty and a big talker (and he joined in the criticism of Rep Steve King of Iowa a couple of weeks ago. Good for Gowdy on this topic but he’s just another blowhard that won’t actually DO ANYTHING to save this country from Obama (or his own party’s leadership).

I want to know what real power, if any, Congress has to bring the executive branch down? Would someone at Hot Air please do an informative article about what Congress can actually do about any of this beside talk to the media and have hearings? Someone has to stop this criminality before we are little more than a dictatorship. Can Congress stop this madness?

blackgriffin on August 2, 2013 at 6:07 PM

The Constitution gives Congress the power of Impeachment.

If a federal official commits a crime or otherwise acts improperly, the House of Representatives may impeach—formally charge—that official. If the official subsequently is convicted in a Senate impeachment trial, he is removed from office.

There is also a handy “Overview of the Impeachment Process” at the link above.

According to Article 1, Section 3, Clause 6 of the Constitution, it would take a 2/3 vote of the Senate to convict a federal official in an impeachement trial.

All of this means we need to Vote Very Carefully in 2014!

We need to vote for Representatives in the House who are strong enough to use their power to impeach.

And we need to vote for 67 Senators who would be willing to vote to convict in a impeachment trial. Note: Only 33 Senate seats are up for re-election in 2014. Without 67 Republican Senators, we would need to convince some Democrat Senators to vote to convict.

And I must say I have a lot of admiration for the Democrat party in this country.

Why?

Because they will fight to the POLITICAL DEATH for WHAT THEY BELIEVE IN.

The gop is just a pathetic little mouse that stands next to the Democrat lion as the great cat roars and shakes the political ground. The republican mouse?….it just squeeks and hopes the Lion will be it’s friend.

I suspect they are worried about what the admin has with which to intimidate them and destroy their careers. Since they monitor everything and spy on us, they sure spy on potential whistleblowers and opponents. All of this spying made me wonder what 0 had on John Roberts.

clnurnberg on August 2, 2013 at 7:32 PM

Former head of the CIA, David Patraeus might have some thoughts to share on how quickly an otherwise honorable career can be destroyed.

I also want to hear more from John Roberts about any pressure he may have felt before his absurd Obamacare decision.

It is like I’ve been saying in every Benghazi thread, he won’t bring any of his arab spring army/Benghazi terrorists to justice because they will talk and his arab league allies will talk. The attack itself might have had the purpose of compromising Obama. The arab allies are participants in a coverup and they have nothing to lose if it is exposed so they can demand anything of Obama and he has to do it.

This CRIMINAL President has violated the Constitution and has broken the law over and over … He has the blood of Americans on his hands from attempting to help criminals & terrorists! It is WAY past time this son of a b!itch is brought to Justice…past time he is IMPEACHED!

“I suspect they are worried about what the admin has with which to intimidate them and destroy their careers. Since they monitor everything and spy on us, they sure spy on potential whistleblowers and opponents. All of this spying made me wonder what 0 had on John Roberts.

clnurnberg on August 2, 2013 at 7:32 PM”

There’s not much question about what zero had on John Roberts. He smuggled his kids in from Ireland to Central America and then here. The regime found out about it and did what they do all the time that is never reported. They blackmailed the sh_t out of of him. Pretty common knowledge in conservative blogger circles actually.

The link above is just one of many threads documenting what Roberts did to adopt his kids. Most of it illegally done. Even the NYT is “supposedly looking into it” but stories seem to be taking a while to hit the presses. Can’t imagine why….

As far as Benghazi goes can there be any doubt at all why 35 spooks were on the ground WTSHTF there?
the annex was a smuggling op facilitated by the CIA! Who knows where the weapons went and if they were sold, traded for WMD,poison gas or nukes, or whatever.
Bottom line it was all illegal as hell and Boehner is still trying to figure out what is going on.
We still have no leadership on our side and until we do we are screwed.

This CRIMINAL President has violated the Constitution and has broken the law over and over … He has the blood of Americans on his hands from attempting to help criminals & terrorists! It is WAY past time this son of a b!itch is brought to Justice…past time he is IMPEACHED!

easyt65 on August 2, 2013 at 11:16 PM
…………………………
Great post and of course the big question is where was zero and what was he doing when TSHTF in Benghazi? Inquiring minds…and all that…

. Then again, that same logic applied to Snowden and he calculated, not unreasonably, that his best defense was to ID himself precisely because it would make the feds think twice about taking him out. – AP

As rodguy911 posted, the best bet is that there is a problem (or at least the appearance of a problem) with the manner in which Roberts and wife privately adopted their two sons.

In a nutshell, it seems that the birth mothers of the two boys were from Ireland, which prohibits private adoptions. The two mothers were transported to South America prior to the births in an effort to circumvent this law; subsequently the children have been described as “adopted from a South American country”, not as “Irish”. That doesn’t sound like such a big deal, but in fact has the taint of human trafficking, which is not a great thing on a SCOTUS CJ’s resume.

Richard Cash has already announced that he is challenging Lindsey Graham for the Republican nomination for South Carolina’s Senate seat.

Nancy Mace is expected to announce that she will also be running for this Republican nomination.

Let’s hope the competition makes both of these challengers better candidates against Lindsey Graham in the June 2014 Primary and against the Democrat candidate in the November General Election.

wren on August 2, 2013 at 4:18 PM

Nancy Mace announced her intentions to primary Miss Lindsey this week. She is an awesome young woman, who just happens to be the first female graduate (from the corps) of The Citadel, The Military College of South Carolina.

Great post and of course the big question is where was zero and what was he doing when TSHTF in Benghazi? Inquiring minds…and all that…

rodguy911 on August 3, 2013 at 6:20 AM

Obama went low profile with no outward appearances of taking command in Benghazi because CIA was instrumental in running guns and rockets to Al Qaeda but the CIA doesn’t do anything without the President’s approval.
i imagine it could be interpreted as illegal or at the very least very dumb and dangerous for us americans as u can see some of the aftershocks of high alert for us from the western sahara to bangladesh now as i type.

ps. maybe good old John McCain is in on this too as he wanted to arm the syrian rebels and they no doubt got some of these weapons. explains the crush mccain has on obama of late.

Years before he is up for reelection explains that. He had a crush on Obama in 2008. John McCain is a pure unadulterated progressive politicians.

astonerii on August 3, 2013 at 9:59 AM

mcain is in to this so deep over libya, syria and arming rebels. remember when rand paul humiliated mccain by saying he couldn’t tell the bad rebels from the good ones in syria if there even were any…hence mccain would support hillary over rand in an election. McCain has crawled up both hillary’s and barack’s rectums for cover. i guess i wouldn’t call mccain progressive but regressive and reverting to old interventional ways that rand paul (i believe rightly) is questioning outloud.

As rodguy911 posted, the best bet is that there is a problem (or at least the appearance of a problem) with the manner in which Roberts and wife privately adopted their two sons.

In a nutshell, it seems that the birth mothers of the two boys were from Ireland, which prohibits private adoptions. The two mothers were transported to South America prior to the births in an effort to circumvent this law; subsequently the children have been described as “adopted from a South American country”, not as “Irish”. That doesn’t sound like such a big deal, but in fact has the taint of human trafficking, which is not a great thing on a SCOTUS CJ’s resume.

both on August 3, 2013 at 8:19 AM

From what I have read and I have read a bit on this one, it apppears that Roberts’ wife was insisting that the children they adopt be from her parents hoe town of Cork County in Ireland. To do that there are loads of rules and laws governing the adoption of such children.
Supposedly the Roberts played the game fast and loose and avoided many of these laws and rules.Later they got caught by the regime and now we have obamcare as not only legal but a tax.

Regardless of why all those folks were there, doesn’t that make the deaths of our four folks even more implausible? Sounds like there was plenty of good guys in the area and that they were clued into something rather big going on so why do we have four dead and lots of injuries that we don’t even know about? Sounds like we had a battle and lost.

Do you think she’s the one who doesn’t want to take any heat about the adoptions? In these days and times, I just don’t think people would give a flying flip. Isn’t Sarah Jessica Whatshername some kind of hero for letting a surrogate take the body damage for a second pregnancy? I know the media would handle it differently because he suppose to be a Republican but seriously, this doesn’t explain his capitulation for me. Just goes to show what we probably don’t know about all sorts of people. Except maybe Sarah Palin, I would be amazed if the media missed anything there.

it may not explain it. maybe Roberts didn’t want to be the one that knocked out universal healthcare for the poor and the downtrodden like some grand white evil poohbah. so he screws it up for everyone. great. maybe bo had nothing on him but fear of his (roberts) legacy.

Regardless of why all those folks were there, doesn’t that make the deaths of our four folks even more implausible? Sounds like there was plenty of good guys in the area and that they were clued into something rather big going on so why do we have four dead and lots of injuries that we don’t even know about? Sounds like we had a battle and lost.

Cindy Munford on August 3, 2013 at 11:39 AM

they were all CIA engaged in arms dealing that will end up putting all of us at much more risk. bo is trying to absolve himself of any part in it but he can’t cause the cia doesn’t makes moves like this without his ok. blaming the video was some amateur attempt (probably val’s idea..that’s how dumb it was) to push the narrative of hillary’s and the president’s innocence. too damn dumb for words.

only so much gowdy can do. he was right about lois lerner and the 5th. they need to incentivize her to spill her guts on this. if they give her immunity and let her off, she may not say anything at all and walk. next time she appears slap the cuffs on her and take her to the nearest dc jail and let her stew. i guess if she’s appointed and not elected you can’t impeach her but you sure can turn up the heat so she’s out retirement, etc. that’ll be what gowdy’s good for.

Perhaps this was supposed to be a “staged” kidnapping of the Ambassador and others . .. This would explain why the Ambassador was in Benghazi that particular night, and why all military were told to “stand down.” TarheelBen on August 2, 2013 at 3:11 PM

This was the rumor the night of the attack. It would have pushed all other news off cable, given Obama a chance to play hero on his own terms right up to election day

Has the theory been dropped that Stevens was supposed to be traded for the Blind Sheikh via a phony kidnapping that went awry? Morsi played a role in trumping up the phony video story after all. onlineanalyst on August 2, 2013 at 3:13 PM

Updated timelines and info on Morsi involvement add credibility to the rumor

Qadaffi had 20 THOUSAND SAM launchers go missing when his regime went down. dogsoldier on August 2, 2013 at 6:23 PM

So many they may not all be held by one group. However, such missiles are already in the world market. Too many airliners down in RU, either landing or on takeoff over the years

The Republicans talk a lot about investigating these scandals but they get absolutely nothing done whatsoever. Sherman1864 on August 2, 2013 at 6:47 PM

Almost as if many are owned, either bought, or blackmailed

Where are the Colonels, the Generals and the Admirals that still have any sense of conscience and any sense of duty to the Constitution and the American people? oldroy on August 2, 2013 at 6:52 PM

Ask Petraeus. He was setup by his own stupidity, and then disposed of. It is hard to be cast adrift without a mil pension.

The arms to Syria explanation doesn’t sound true to me.
SteveMG on August 2, 2013 at 2:08 PM

Nor to me. Reason: they didnt need a Syria story. it would have been very easy to create a story about defending an arms cache being protected by the CIA. It would have been our lie against their lies.

Pre election there was no Syria uprising. Pre election, it would have been deadly to arm Syrian rebels. They might use them. Obama might not come out smelling like a rose. It has taken months of MSM massaging to stage the Syrian rebels as the good guys

IMHO the video blows out the current Syria cover story. They had the video story down pat, and it took Morsi to pump it.

However, now there is a Syria uprising. Now there is something new to stir the mud. Some Benghazi witnesses have been identified. They might talk. Time for a story with a link to current events

Something even Charlie Rangel can get his false teeth into

Of course, that raises the question of why the attackers — some of whom have been interviewed by U.S. media — haven’t already spilled the beans to reporters.

IMHO if Syrian arms supplying was involved it would have long been outed by other islamist allies of the Syrian rebel forces. It would have been bragged about on islamist web sites.

And why no whistleblowers? Maybe they didn’t want to end up like Seal Team 6

Snowden was smart. I thank him for his service to my liberty. I believe if he went through proper channels, he would have been snuffed. Which Congressman would would you trust. Which inspector general? Which federal prosecutor?

Nixon participated in the cover-up of a wire-tapping…and he was forced from office.

Obama participated in the continuing cover up of Fast And Furious, in the defense of an Attorney General who broke the law by Perjurying himself 3 times before Congress, and yet was still unable to prevent Holder from becoming the 1st AG in US history to be Censured for crimes.

Over and over Obama has violated both his Oath of Office and the Constitution as well as has broken our laws.

Obama hired terrorists to protect our Ambassador, refused to provide adequate security, abandoned & betrayed Americans, allowed the murder of the 1st ambassador in 30 years, ordered the military not to go to the aid of Americans under fire, and allowed 4 Americans to die to cover up his illegal gun running to Jihadists / terrorists in Syria…and continues to engage in the cover up.

His Atty General was then caught perpetrating ANOTHER Felony crime of Perjury before Congress, and again Obama protected him, when he denied knowing about the spying on of media editors, reporters, & their families…only to tell Congress later that he authorized it all. The cover up continues.

Then we learned that under Obama the Patriot Act was turned into something it was never meant to be, a tool for a dictator-wannabe to spy on every American citizen, violating the 4th Amendment to do so, thus turning America into his own Socialist Police State.

Now that there is proof of Obama’s Syrian gun running, will Congress….the GOP…ANY politician….find the morals, ethics, COURAGE to FINALLY Impeach Obama? Compared to Nixon, Obama should have been Impeached 4 times already. The problem is NOT that you can’t compare Obama to Nixon – you can, but Obama IS a crook…and a threat to the United States. The problem is we can’t compare our Congress/Senate of today to those during the Nixon administration. Today’s politicians now serve themselves, their parties, and their benefactors…they have forgotten and abandoned their oaths & the Constitution just as Obama has. They are gutlessness cowards who want to make a million & Leach off the very citizens & nation they are too cowardly to protect & defend!

Regardless of why all those folks were there, doesn’t that make the deaths of our four folks even more implausible? Sounds like there was plenty of good guys in the area and that they were clued into something rather big going on so why do we have four dead and lots of injuries that we don’t even know about? Sounds like we had a battle and lost.
Cindy Munford on August 3, 2013 at 11:39 AM

They were all CIA engaged in arms dealing that will end up putting all of us at much more risk. bo is trying to absolve himself of any part in it but he can’t cause the cia doesn’t makes moves like this without his ok. blaming the video was some amateur attempt (probably val’s idea..that’s how dumb it was) to push the narrative of hillary’s and the president’s innocence. too damn dumb for words.

gracie on August 3, 2013 at 2:03 PM

………………………………….

The big question besides where was zero and what was he doing with whom when all this went down is who actually hired Ansar al Sharia to do the dirty work and why.
Initially, it was thought that Ansar al Sharia was hired by Morsi(remember the story of don’t shoot us Dr.Morsi sent us) under the direction of zero (who bribed Morsi with 8 billion of our bucks and now owns lock, stock, etc.) to trade the blind sheik for Stevens.
It all went wrong and supposedly Stevens died from smoke inhalation.

There’s a wide variety of stories about how he died from hot shots to a sodomized body to who knows.And no no one will know since his body, as that of Breitbart/Hastings, were all burnt up and turned into ashes that don’t tell us any stories. A pattern begins to emerge.
One of the questions is if Stevens was given a lethal injection in several places of his body that an autopsy couldn’t pickup who did it and why.It’s not terror type style but sure could be covert op style,if you get my drift.And recently we learned that there were 35 CIA types at Benghazi during the raid sooooo…..
Recently, its been suggested that Iran,Russia and Syria were behind Benghazi to stem the shipping of arms that was going on there.
If I had the money I would hire a true journalist to get to the bottom of what really happened.

Don’t get too upset by any of this. You’ll get used to living under a tyrannical government pretty easily. Pretty soon everyone will get used to it, as long as the food holds out and there’s a chance to pick up a few goodies.

I was in Korea under the Park regime for five years. There was martial law the entire time. There was a midnight curfew, military checkpoints everywhere, and no public demonstrations or strikes allowed. In fact their were no public meetings except through the government or a religion. Plain clothes police would follow you or a family member home and search without a warrant. People were beaten up by police or soldiers on the street in broad daylight. People, including foreigners, could be held for weeks without charges.

But heh, the economy was booming, which in those times meant coming out of third world status. There was plenty to eat, and there was a thriving black market in all sorts of luxury goods. People quickly adapted to minding their own business and trying to improve their lot. The only real crime to speak of were burglaries, so people’s houses were fortified like little military encampments, with walls topped with barbed wire and steel gates. It enhanced your feeling of being in control of something.

Believe me, you’ll get used to the whole thing in no time at all. Eventually the Republic will come to be seen as inconvenient, and freedom as dangerous and foolish.

McCain has to be even dumber than I thought to get in bed with this regime. All zero is interested in is an Islamic Sunni caliphate. To do that Assad has to go and the MB installed. Too many shia there.
McCain actually thinks zero cares about the people there who are being savaged by Assad. That goes on in any muslim enclave ruled by sharia type kings. They are all butchers. That’s the nature of Islam.